Rhodia Chemical Co. v. United States
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, Judge
On the 2d of December, 1921, the importer protested that the rate of 25 per cent ad valorem imposed by the collector on acetate of cellulose, under paragraph 25 of the act of 1913, was not warranted by law and claimed that the merchandise was dutiable either at 15 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 5, or at 20 per cent ad valorem under paragraph 17, or at 15 per cent ad valorem under the first clause of paragraph 25, or at the same rate under paragraph 385.
On the 18th of January, 1923, the importer moved to amend his protests by inserting a claim that the goods were dutiable at 20 per cent…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- John v. PaullinSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Sullivan v. HaugMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- Hodges v. KimballCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1899
- Messenger v. TeaganMichigan Supreme Court · 1895
- State ex rel. Harris v. LaflinNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- United States v. Thalson Co.United States Customs Court · 1952
- Edna Brass Manufacturing Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1927